Merge it in with the macro capability.
That would be an immediate subroutine. One that simply returns
undef. (i.e. Nothing inserted into the parse stream.)
Hmm, maybe nothing needs to be added to that.
> "NT" == Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
NT> I'm chewing over an RFC on
John Porter writes:
> > If you wanted to make that parsable, pretend that BEGIN and END are
> > the names of functions with prototype (&) which register callbacks.
>
> I agree ... except that, in perl5 at least, you'd need a terminating
> semicolon if that analogy were 100% accurate.
I realized
Nathan Torkington wrote:
> These aren't normal subroutines because of the way they stack. If I
> had my druthers, I'd make "sub" *forbidden* on such things.
I like that idea. But then, they also shouldn't go into the symbol table.
At least, not as CODE.
> If you wanted to make that parsable,
At 10:17 AM 8/8/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>These aren't normal subroutines because of the way they stack. If I
>had my druthers, I'd make "sub" *forbidden* on such things.
>
>If you wanted to make that parsable, pretend that BEGIN and END are
>the names of functions with prototype (&) wh
